Yeah I would do 5/3/1 if I was you the percentages and sets reps are a bit different but similar enough that you might as well go with either program. More people on 5/3/1 so if you ever had a question might be a better database to draw from though. And if Wendler came in here and saw this asshole with the linear progression for beginners only shit would hit the fan.
[quote]Butan wrote:
I would say between trained and strong in the relative strength standards.
[quote]LiquidMercury wrote:
The more advanced you get, the slower the gains. Do yourself a favor and simply stop attempting to give advice. Learn.[/quote]
Learn? Haha, I’m talking from experience. only thing im learning right now is how hopelessly poor standard can be in people’s mind.
Thrive for more than you though you could at first though, this is a lesson worth learning wise guy.
Comfy linear progression is only good for beginners who are afraid to break a leg if they do more than the recommended weights!
[/quote]
Always listen to the French on exercise advice…
[quote]LiquidMercury wrote:
[quote]Butan wrote:
Seems like a good compound program, albeit +5lbs/bench +10lbs/squat-dead per month is a very slow progression.
Be sure to go all out on each exercise to determine your true 1RM before beginning and dont be afraid to workout more like 3times/6days if you got the time/drive and/or put more than the requested weight every time you finish a cycle if you feel too comfortable; it wont kill you (but if it does, I reject all responsability) and will make you progress faster.[/quote]
5 lbs/month on bench is slow? You do realize that at the end of the year that’d be 60 lbs on your bench and 120 lbs on squat/dead by your calculations (if things actually worked out that way).
I’d kill for 120 lbs on my squat/deadlift in a year and 60 on my bench.
OP: Ignore this moron.[/quote]
This times a billion jillion.
Linear progression isnt shit like some though I meant, its good to begin with but then when you begin to feel it (aka intermediate level) its better to monitor yourself every workout days and aim for the extra pounds you can in the gold days, not just something pre-established that will in the end slow you down… except if the recommended progression is already customised to what you can do (which is ofc never really the case).
[quote]RampantBadger wrote:
Always listen to the French on exercise advice…
[/quote]
I was waiting for this one, a bit disappointed that I had to wait for 3 days haha
Linear progression can be good for people of all levels…just ask Chad Smith who smoked a 905 squat using his training system that centers around linear periodization. Ask the hundred of other elite guys who use it with some sort of consistency.
For someone who seems so devout in this belief, and giving off such brilliant advice I’d be curious as to what your actual lifts are and if you are even at “intermediate”.
For me linear progression lose potential with total time spent under the bar… but ofc it remains a good principle, even at worst, and if I ever hit a wall I would certainly find solace in this kind of training mindset.
I’m sure OP and any human being can do almost double what this program tells for at least the few first months, I also doubt that it would work for a year straight like you said earlier.
So you’ve continuously backed away from what you originally said…from it’s not good for intermediate lifters to “you could find solace in it”…
That being said, yes it can be run for a year. Hell I ran 5/3/1 for a year and put on a good amount on my total.
I lifted westside style for years . Then due to injuries I half assed it. The I started training with Josh doing linear progression.
It took me from 585 to 605 and close to 625, missed at the knees. He thinks I’m going to be around 650 in two months . I’m 48 and a huge crap and pee over 200 lbs fwiw.
Lifting heavy works. I’m starting to think or know that the details are less important than the effort and consistency in showing up and prehab/rehab stuff to keep you in the game.
[quote]jt339 wrote:
[quote]animus wrote:
Uhm… Going at 90% for 3x3 isn’t a deload.[/quote]
It’s only a deload in the sense of volume is cut which I suppose is better than no deload. [/quote]
Wrong. It’s like getting hit with a bigger bullet , but less times. You’re still getting shot pretty bad.
[quote]tom63 wrote:
Lifting heavy works. I’m starting to think or know that the details are less important than the effort and consistency in showing up and prehab/rehab stuff to keep you in the game.[/quote]
This is full of wisdom, should be a sticky for all especially beginners.
If I may add, the ratio of “prehab/rehab stuff” threads to “what routine should I follow” threads ought to be the opposite of what it is.
[quote]tom63 wrote:
Lifting heavy works. I’m starting to think or know that the details are less important than the effort and consistency in showing up and prehab/rehab stuff to keep you in the game.[/quote]
Emphasis on the prehab/rehab. Wish I had been doing more of it.
I’m not sure that program involves much of a deload for the joints (light weights)
With respect to ‘beginners’ vs ‘intermediate’ I always used the term (like Ripptoe) to differentiate between someone who could still make linear progression (beginner) and someone who could not DESPITE having nutrition, sleep, stress levels etc fairly much in order.
The latter stages of being a beginner is (on this understanding) harder than the early stages of being an intermediate in the sense that beginners don’t get to deload - they are required to increase the weight every time they train. I know once I get to a certain point in my squats the weight just feels freaking heavy. Once you get to that point squats just feel freaking heavy every single time you train - but you gotta keep increasing the weight on them every single time you train regardless. I think sometimes people bail a little too early on a beginner progression program instead of seeing how things like cutting accessory lifts, dialing in their nutrition, getting more sleep etc can really impact on their ability to train. So much easier to take an option with light days etc prematurely.
I don’t know what this shit is about intermediates benefiting from linear progression (since by definition they can’t) or linear progression being an easier option than a program that has deloads / light days built in.
Guess people mean something different when they use the term ‘beginner’…
[quote]alexus wrote:
I don’t know what this shit is about intermediates benefiting from linear progression (since by definition they can’t)
[/quote]
What? Where in the hell do people get that intermediate/advanced people can’t benefit from linear progression? There are so many examples in the upper echelons that dispute this it’s ridiculous…
[quote]LiquidMercury wrote:
[quote]alexus wrote:
I don’t know what this shit is about intermediates benefiting from linear progression (since by definition they can’t)
[/quote]
What? Where in the hell do people get that intermediate/advanced people can’t benefit from linear progression? There are so many examples in the upper echelons that dispute this it’s ridiculous…[/quote]
Its Rippetoe’s opinion in practical programming. Decent read, but I never tried the LP like he prescribes and its been bastardized by a handful of people trying to make $$ of e-books.
He defines beginners as people who can add weight every workout i.e. linear progression or starting strength, then intermediates who have to go heavy-light-medium or volume-back off-intensity ala the Texas Method and increment weekly, and he does have some discussion on more advanced training methods in the book.
The thing is, most Rippetoe acolytes haven’t even finished or tried the linear progression, end up parroting what they read in his book, without even having the common courtesy to experiment on themselves before preaching it as gospel.
Well…
Once my front squat stalled (I’m an Oly Lifter mostly) with linear progression… Stalled for a while there… I got more sleep trying to get it moving… I started devouring rotissery chickens… Once it had well and truly stalled…
I did the Russian Squat Routine. Most of the Russian Squat Routine (based of actual training 1RM - not this 95% or 90% training max stuff) was a walk in the park compared to the weights I had been moving each time (in my stalled state) attempting to match even if I could not beat what I’d done the session before on 5x5.
Of course elite class lifters could have a go at ‘Starting Strength’ if they wanted to. Start with just the bar (lolz) and add 2.5-5kg to the bar every time they trained… I guess they would make linear progression in the sense that they could increase the weight and do the reps each and every time they trained for quite a while there…
That wouldn’t be linear progression though, would it?? Wouldn’t it be more of a regression??
Can a program not be linear progression and also not be conjugate method training?
i thought every program was linear except the ones where you have bicep days?
if a program is non linear then your not going to make gains in anything.
wait, how can a program even be non linear?
At a stab could ego get in the way a little here? “I’m WAY to advanced for that” etc?..
I don’t know maybe, OP I would have a go at that program but personally I’d throw a deload week in after 3x3 and keep in assistance work in, you’ll get more volume and the rest will do you good, just my 2 cent (take it if you will)
I’m giving the 6 week template outlined by tim hendrique (sp?) in a recent article a go, I’ll see how it goes.
Man, it seems like 95% of the arguments/discussion on this forum can boil down to the variance in definition of “beginner/advanced/elite”
[quote]jacob-1310 wrote:
i thought every program was linear except the ones where you have bicep days?
if a program is non linear then your not going to make gains in anything.
wait, how can a program even be non linear? [/quote]
Conjugate periodization is an example of non-linear progression. Additionally you have linear periodization versus linear progression, which operate differently.